History of the war in the Peninsula and in the south of France from the year 1807 to the year 1814, vol. 5Napier, William Francis Patrick
History
History of the war in the Peninsula and in the south of France from the year 1807 to the year 1814, vol. 5
Napier, William Francis Patrick
Peninsular War, 1807-1814
It is not for me to impugn this principle in any case, still less in
that of a son defending the memory of his father; but it gives me
the right which I now assert, to disregard any verbal insult which
Mr. Perceval, intentionally or unintentionally, has offered to me
or may offer to me in future. When a gentleman relieves himself
from personal responsibility by the adoption of this principle, his
language can no longer convey insult to those who do not reject such
responsibility; and it would be as unmanly to use insulting terms
towards him in return as it would be to submit to them from a person
not so shielded. Henceforth therefore I hold Mr. Perceval’s language
to be innocuous, but for the support of my own accuracy, veracity,
and justice, as an historian, I offer these my “_Counter-Remarks_.”
They must of necessity lacerate Mr. Perceval’s feelings, but they
are, I believe, scrupulously cleared of any personal incivility, and
if any passage having that tendency has escaped me I thus apologize
before-hand.
Mr. Perceval’s pamphlet is copious in declamatory expressions of his
own feelings; and it is also duly besprinkled with animadversions on
Napoleon’s vileness, the horrors of jacobinism, the wickedness of
democrats, the propriety of coercing the Irish, and such sour dogmas
of melancholy ultra-toryism. Of these I reck not. Assuredly I did
not write with any expectation of pleasing men of Mr. Perceval’s
political opinions and hence I shall let his general strictures pass,
without affixing my mark to them, and the more readily as I can
comprehend the necessity of ekeing out a scanty subject. But where
he has adduced specific argument and authority for his own peculiar
cause,—weak argument indeed, for it is his own, but strong authority,
for it is the duke of Wellington’s,—I will not decline discussion.
Let the most honoured come first.
The Duke of Wellington, replying to a letter from Mr. Perceval, in
which the point at issue is most earnestly and movingly begged by the
latter, writes as follows:—
_London, June 6, 1835._
DEAR SIR,
I received last night your letter of the 5th. Notwithstanding my
great respect for Colonel Napier and his work, I have never read
a line of it; because I wished to avoid being led into a literary
controversy, which I should probably find more troublesome than the
operations which it is the design of the Colonel’s work to describe
and record.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account